The Role of CO2-EOR for the Development of a CCTS Infrastructure in the North Sea Region: A Techno-Economic Model and Application

Mendelevitch, Roman

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2294422

Cited by 10 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4 A detailed description of the cost data can be found in Mendelevitch (2014). emission volumes of refineries, steel and cement production facilities as well as coal-and gas-fired power plants is taken from a database developed earlier in Oei, Herold, & Mendelevitch (2014 Source: Own illustration based on Oei, Herold, & Mendelevitch (2014) and Mendelevitch (2014). …”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 The given costs only include the additional variable and fixed costs for equipping a power plant or industrial facility with a capturing unit compared to a facility without a capturing unit. Mendelevitch (2014).…”

Section: Sensitivity To Investment and Variable Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 Data specification used for coal-fired power plants in (Mendelevitch, 2014) 8 EC (2013); based on emission factor 0.9 tCO 2 /MWh, load factor 86%, reference power plant: 2100€/kW overnight capital costs Table 4 summarizes the results of the different Europe-wide scenarios. In the EU_40% scenario only four iron and steel factories in Norway and Estonia invest in the capture technology as they profit from the industry's low variable and fixed costs.…”

Section: Sensitivity To Investment and Variable Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

European Scenarios of CO2 Infrastructure Investment until 2050

Oei¹,

Mendelevitch²

2016

The Energy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Scenarios assuming low CO 2 certificate prices lead to hardly any CCTS development in Europe. The iron and steel sector starts deployment as soon as the CO 2 certificate price exceeds 50 €/tCO 2 . The cement sector starts investing at a threshold of 75 €/tCO 2 , followed by the electricity sector when prices exceed 100 €/tCO 2 . Results on the degree of deployment of CCTS are found to be more sensitive to variable cost of CO 2 capture than to investment costs. Additional revenues from using the CO 2 for enhanced oil recovery (CO 2 -EOR) in the North Sea would lead to an earlier adoption of CCTS, independent of the CO 2 certificate price; this case may become especially relevant for the UK, Norway and the Netherlands. On the downside, scattered CCTS deployment increases unit cost of transport and storage infrastructure by 30% and more. Terms of use: Documents in

show abstract

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sensitivity To Investment and Variable Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sensitivity To Investment and Variable Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

European Scenarios of CO2 Infrastructure Investment until 2050

Oei¹,

Mendelevitch²

2016

The Energy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Europe, a number of the projected CO 2 pipeline infrastructures will have a transnational nature (e.g., Mendelevitch, 2014). So, there is a possibility for these infrastructures to be supervised by a collection of national regulatory authorities.…”

Section: The Case Of Transnational Co 2 Pipelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the 7 These contributions are directly related to the operations research literature on the optimal design of a pipeline network, a well-known problem with numerous applications in the energy industries (e.g., Rothfarb et al, 1970;Bhaskaran and Salzborn, 1979;Brimberg et al, 2003;Babonneau et al, 2012;André et al, 2013). 8 This statement is also shared by Mendelevitch (2014) Herzog (2011, p. 600) 10 We refer to Sandler and Tschirhart (1980) for a comprehensive presentation of these notions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Joining the CCS club! The economics of CO 2 pipeline projects

Massol

Tchung-Ming

Banal‐Estañol

2015

European Journal of Operational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The large-scale diffusion of Carbon Capture, transport and Storage (CCS) imposes the construction of a sizeable CO 2 pipeline infrastructure. This paper examines the economics of a CO 2 pipeline project and analyzes the conditions for a widespread adoption of CCS by a group of emitters that can be connected to that infrastructure. It details a modeling framework aimed at assessing the break-even value for joint CCS adoption, that is the critical value in the charge for CO 2 emissions that is required for each of the emitters to decide to implement capture capabilities. This model can be used to analyze how the tariff structure and the regulatory constraints imposed on the CO 2 pipeline operator modify the overall cost of CO 2 abatement via CCS. This framework is applied to the case of a real European CO 2 pipeline project. We find that the obligation to use cross-subsidy-free pipeline tariffs has a minor impact on the minimum CO 2 price required to adopt the CCS. In contrast, the obligation to charge non-discriminatory prices can either impede the adoption of CCS or significantly raises that price. Besides, we compared two alternative regulatory frameworks for CCS pipelines: a common European organization as opposed to a collection of national regulations. The results indicate that the institutional scope of that regulation has a limited impact on the adoption of CCS compared to the detailed design of the tariff structure imposed to pipeline operators.

show abstract

A coal‐based strategy to reduce Europe's dependence on Russian energy imports

Bezdek¹

2014

Mining Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Europe is dangerously dependent on Russian natural gas (NG): 13 European nations rely on Russian NG for over 50 % of their requirements ( Fig. 1). In addition, Europe relies on Russia for about one third of its oil imports. Europe is acutely aware of this high level of energy dependence, which has been, once again, highlighted by the Ukrainian crisis. The European Council March 2014 Brussels Summit Meeting focused on Europe's energy dependence on Russia, especially for NG.[2] The Summit recommended that efforts be intensified to reduce Europe's gas energy dependency and that the EU accelerate diversification of its energy supply. However, via a carefully thought out strategy, Europe can significantly reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies through greater utilization of clean coal. 1Europe's natural gas problemThe International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts that Europe's NG production is likely to gradually decline while consumption increases, and the need for imports thus increases over the next two decades (Fig. 2). Given current trends, the EU will import over 80 % of its NG needs by 2030, and the gap between consumption and production will continue to widen.[3] Shale gas may be available for incremental production, but no major forecasting agency is projecting significant European shale output for the foreseeable future. High population density, a lack of mineral rights ownership, public opposition and unique geology are the main impediments. Without sufficient production, Europe has historically imported NG, but an increasingly tight global market may make it difficult to reduce reliance on Russian NG. World LNG demand is forecast to grow strongly over the next two decades, especially in Asia -where prices are already the highest. China is in the process of dramatically increasing its LNG import capacity, and some believe that China could become the major driver of demand in the international gas market. [4] European LNG prices will continue to increase, and forecasts of U.S. LNG prices in Europe are in the range of $13-14/MMBtu (2013$) by 2025. 2 NG prices are likely to continue to trend higher than projections because 50 % of Europe's current gas is price indexed to oil. 3 LNG at $11-13/MMBtu for Europe is highly optimistic: Oil-indexed NG prices (2012$) could exceed $14/MMBtu within a decade, and this implies that in current (nominal) dollars NG prices could be in the range of $20-25/MMBtu. Identifying other optionsThe EU's share of global energy resources -about 3 % -is relatively small.[5] Out of the EU's total resources, supplies of coal and lignite are the largest component, comprising 88 % of energy reserves and 95 % of resources (Fig. 3). Accordingly, the EU's endowment of coal is orders of magnitude larger than that of oil and gas combined.[5] In fact, the EU has a 97-year supply of coal, but just a 12-year supply of oil and gas.[6] Initiatives that increase the use of coal will thus diversify Europe's energy sources and enhance its energy security. Although Europe is still a large coal pr...

show abstract

The Role of CO2-EOR for the Development of a CCTS Infrastructure in the North Sea Region: A Techno-Economic Model and Application

Cited by 10 publications

References 31 publications

European Scenarios of CO2 Infrastructure Investment until 2050

European Scenarios of CO2 Infrastructure Investment until 2050

Joining the CCS club! The economics of CO 2 pipeline projects

A coal‐based strategy to reduce Europe's dependence on Russian energy imports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About